The special PMLA court summoned Raj Kundra and Rajesh Satija in a Rs 6,606 crore bitcoin money laundering case linked to Variabletech Pvt Ltd. The Enforcement Directorate alleges Kundra received 285 bitcoins worth Rs 150.47 crore, concealed wallet details, and disguised transactions with his wife to hide illegal proceeds. The court found sufficient prima facie evidence to proceed.

Mumbai: The special PMLA court in its order issuing summons to actress Shilpa Shetty’s husband and businessman Raj Kundra and New Delhi-based businessman Rajesh Satija, has said that the prosecution complaint and the record of the case, it prima-facie shows that he is involved in the offence of money laundering.

About The Case

The Enforcement Directorate had filed a supplementary prosecution complaint in connection with the money-laundering probe in Rs6,606 crore bitcoin scam involving Delhi-based company Variabletech Pvt Ltd (VTPL), against Kundra and Satija, last year. The special court while taking cognizance of the complaint said: “There is sufficient material to proceed against accused Nos.17 (Kundra) and accused no 18 (Rajesh Ram Satija) for the offence under section 3 punishable under section 4 of the PMLA.

The ED has made out a prima-facie case to take cognizance and to proceed against accused Nos.17 and 18 for the offence under section 3 punishable under section 4 of the PMLA and to issue proceedings against them.” The court noted the allegation made by the ED stating that, “Kundra has received proceeds of crime in the form of Bitcoins and he continued to be in possession and enjoyment of the said proceeds of crime.

He has received 285 Bitcoins valued at Rs150.47 crore (at rate of Rs52,79,755/- per bitcoins as on April 16, 2024). He deliberately refused to divulge the wallet addresses and failed to surrender the proceeds of crime (285 Bitcoins) received from accused Amit Bhardwaj. He is the beneficiary of the 285 Bitcoins (proceeds of crime).”

“He has not only acquired/received the proceeds of crime from criminal activities, but to layer the transactions so as to give colour of genuine transaction, he has done sale transaction with his wife at a rate which is far below market rate to disguise the origin of funds obtained by commission of criminal activities to conceal or disguise the illegal origin of the said funds and to layer it with intent to evade the legal consequences of his actions,” the court said in its order, referring to the ED’s allegations.